2009 Real Air Travel Consumer Report Card

Transcript

FlyersRights.org 2009 Real Air Travel Consumer Report Card February 15, 2010 Kate Hanni, Executive Director Dr. Frederick J. Foreman, Research Director Coalition for an Airline Passengers Bill of Rights 159 Silverado Springs Drive, Napa, CA 94558 (707) 337-0328 Executive Summary The 2009 edition of the Airline Report Card include grades for the performance of various entities in how they manage, mitigate, and reduce excessive surface delays or long TARMAC times. The categories include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Airline performance Airport Performance Affiliated Airlines Performance Unreported Performance Data Longest Aggregated Times In addition, Grades for the following items are included: 1. Airline Food Availability if an Excessive Surface Delay Occurs 2. Water Quality Also, the 2009 Report Card includes: 1. Passenger Costs to Fly 2. Best and Worst Performance Awards 3. Most Wanted The grading system used is discussed for each grading category. The scores given to each airline is mostly based on information that the airlines provided as public information as well as data from news releases and data obtained from the Flyers Rights Organization Hotline. The information contained in this report is meant to inform the public of what is really happening to passengers flying in the National Airspace System (NAS). This report card also grade the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Air Transport Association in their performance in either hindering or supporting the passenger’s safety, comfort, and experience in choosing to travel by air. Page 2 of 28 Contents 1 2 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 5 2009 Airline Report Card..................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 2.2 3 4 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours............................................ 7 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours......................................... 8 Airport Score Card .............................................................................................................................. 9 2009 Affiliated Airline Score Card ..................................................................................................... 12 4.1 4.2 Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours......................... 13 Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours....................... 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Flyers Rights Organization Most Wanted List ................................................................................... 14 2009 Airline Grades for Unreported Excessive Surface Delays ........................................................ 14 2009 Longest Recorded Aggregated Times ...................................................................................... 15 2009 Grades for Airline Food Availability .......................................................................................... 16 2009 Airline Water Quality Grades: Don’t Drink the Water................................................................ 17 What does it really Cost to Fly?..................................................................................................... 20 2009 Best and Worst Awards ........................................................................................................ 21 Special Awards ......................................................................................................................... 22 2009 Agencies and Associations Report Card .......................................................................... 23 2009 DOT/FAA Report Card ............................................................................................. 23 2009 Air Transport Association Grade and Award ............................................................ 26 11.1 11.2 11.2.1 11.2.2 12 Most Wanted Transportation Safety Improvements ...................................................................... 26 Page 3 of 28 Tables Table 1: 2009 Airline Excessive Surface Delays Data ................................................................................ 6 Table 2: 2009 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours..................................... 7 Table 3: 2009 Airline Grading System for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours .............................. 7 Table 4: 2009 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours.................................. 8 Table 5: Airline Grading System for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours..................................... 9 Table 6: OEP 35 Airport Excessive Surface Delays Data: 2009 ............................................................... 10 Table 7: 2009 OEP 35 Airport Score Card ................................................................................................ 11 Table 8: OEP 35 Airport Grading System ................................................................................................. 12 Table 9: Delta Conglomerate .................................................................................................................... 12 Table 10: American Conglomerate ........................................................................................................... 13 Table 11: Continental Conglomerate ........................................................................................................ 13 Table 12: Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours......................... 13 Table 13: Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours ...................... 13 Table 14: FAA-DOT Most Wanted List...................................................................................................... 14 Table 15: 2009 Grades for Some Unreported Excessive Surface Delay Flights ....................................... 15 Table 16: 2009 Longest Recorded Aggregated Times .............................................................................. 16 Table 17: 2009 Airline Food Availability Grading System ......................................................................... 17 Table 18: 2009 Airline Grades for Food Availability .................................................................................. 17 Table 19: 2009 Airline Grades for Water Quality....................................................................................... 19 Table 20: Phone Reservations, Checked Baggage, and Seat Selection Fees ......................................... 20 Table 21: Beverages, Drinks, Meals, Oversize Bag, and Standby or Confirmed Seat Fee....................... 21 Table 22: Travel with Pets, Unaccompanied Minors, Curbside Check-in, and Non-Refundable Ticket Change Fees ............................................................................................................................................ 21 Table 23: Special Award Winners ............................................................................................................. 22 Table 24: Agency/Associations Score Card .............................................................................................. 23 Table 25: Rationale for Assigning a Grade of A+ for the DOT actions in 2009 ......................................... 24 Table 26: Air Transport Association 2009 Report Card............................................................................. 26 Table 27: Airline Response and Required Action to NTSB Safety Requests ............................................ 27 Page 4 of 28 1 Introduction This report card is based on government statistics, press reports, airline website data, FlyersRights.org hotline reports, and eye witness accounts provided by our coalition members for the period from January 2009 through December 2009. Released on the eve of the third anniversary of the infamous St. Valentine’s Day 2007 Ice Storm and horrific airline tarmac strandings that resulted, conditions have not gotten any better for airline passengers. Airlines continue to strand passengers on tarmacs without food, water, access to medical facilities and with overflowing toilets. Fortunately, some progress has been made. On December 21, 2009 the DOT announced their enforceable version of a 3 hour rule, as ordered by President Obama in an executive order of the same date. And the outlook is good for some form of legislation to pass this year. The goals of the Coalition for an Airline Passenger’s Bill of Rights follow: 1) What’s Possible: a. That airline passengers’ general well being and needs are provided for by all airlines. 2) What We Intend as an Outcome: a. Legislation to hold airlines accountable to honoring basic passenger rights 3) How We’ll Know When We Are There: a. Legislation is passed that both defines and states a clear minimum standard for deplanement, provides for passengers’ essential needs while experiencing an extended onboard delay mandates truth in disclosure regarding chronically delayed flights and cancelled flights, and returns baggage to folks within 24 hours. b. When CAPBOR Scorecards indicate excellence in Customer Service, Honesty and Execution of the newly defined minimum standards This report card focuses primarily on airlines that report performance data to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), but with emphasis on those carriers for which no Government data is available such as those code share partners that represent less than 1% of the GDS or International flights. The data included herein is empirical data reported by passengers who have been on these planes reporting the amount of time they’ve been trapped without the ability to deplane, and media accounts that covered these events. Page 5 of 28 2 2009 Airline Report Card Airlines that report to the Department of Transportation (DOT) their TARMAC performance are graded for their ability to manage and reduce excessive surface delays. The grades are assigned based on the frequency of occurrence of an excessive surface delay experienced by the airline. This grading system is scaled based on the average number of flights between each occurrence of an excessive surface delay. There are two (2) grades that are awarded for each airline: 1. A grade for all excessive surface delays ≥ two (2) hours 2. A grade for all excessive surface delays ≥ three (3) hours The data for the grades are derived from the Department of Transportation (DOT) Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) from January through December, 2009. This data is summarized in Table 1. Table 1: 2009 Airline Excessive Surface Delays Data 120+ 120-179 180+ Total Flights Minutes Minutes Minutes Rank 262 267 478 278 492 440 381 169 302 91 307 103 93 28 73 158 182 5 0 4,109 70 54 146 99 112 110 46 43 35 32 56 19 18 4 10 16 33 1 0 904 332 321 624 377 604 550 427 212 337 123 363 122 111 32 83 174 215 6 0 5,013 194,336 151,774 428,007 377,049 413,907 551,597 310,717 293,133 258,159 244,128 437,009 251,415 262,973 86,989 299,000 547,572 1,132,278 137,322 72,920 6,450,285 2 1 3 7 4 8 5 10 6 12 9 11 13 14 16 15 17 18 19 Carrier JetBlue Comair Delta United US Airways American ExpressJet Northwest Continental Mesa American Eagle AirTran Pinnacle Frontier Atlantic Southeast SkyWest Southwest Alaska Hawaiian Total 180+ Minutes Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 The ranking for each airline is based on the number of excessive surface delays experienced by the airline on a per flight basis. As shown in Table 1, JetBlue, Comair, and Delta Airlines hold the Page 6 of 28 top three (3) spots for the worst performers through November in 2009. Alaska and Hawaiian Airlines are the best performers through November in 2009. 2.1 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours Table 2 shows the airline grades for their performance in 2009 for handling excessive surface delays ≥ two (2) hours. Table 3 shows the grading system that was used for scoring each airline. Table 2: 2009 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours Airline Comair JetBlue US Airways Delta ExpressJet Continental United American American Eagle Northwest Mesa AirTran Pinnacle Frontier SkyWest Atlantic Southeast Southwest Alaska Hawaiian Grade F F F F F F DDDDD D+ D+ CC C+ B A+ A+ Frequency 1 1 in 473 1 in 585 1 in 685 2 in 686 1 in 728 1 in 766 1 in 1000 1 in 1,003 1 in 1,204 1 in 1,383 1 in 1,985 2 in 2,061 1 in 2,369 1 in 2,718 1 in 3,147 1 in 3,602 1 in 5,266 1 in 22,887 No Delays Note that Comair, JetBlue, Delta, US Airways, ExpressJet, Continental, and United all received a failing grade for their performance in managing excessive surface delays≥ two (2) hours, while Southwest, Alaska, and Hawaiian Airlines had a respectable grade. Hawaiian Airlines is to be especially commended. Passengers that flew Hawaiian Airlines did not experience a single excessive surface delay through November of 2009. Table 3: 2009 Airline Grading System for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours Grade A+ A AB+ 1 Frequency 6,500+ 6,000 - 6,499 5,500 - 5,999 5,000 - 5,499 Frequency of Occurrence: Average number of flights between an Excessive Surface Delay ≥ two (2) hours Page 7 of 28 B BC+ C CD+ D DF 4,500 - 4,999 4,000 - 4,499 3,500 - 3,999 3,000 - 3,499 2,500 - 2,999 2,000 - 2,499 1,500 - 1,999 1,000 - 1,499 1 - 999 2.2 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours Table 4 shows the airline grades for their performance in 2009 for handling excessive surface delays ≥ three (3) hours. Table 4: 2009 Airline Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours Airline JetBlue Comair Delta United US Airways American ExpressJet Northwest Continental Mesa American Eagle AirTran Pinnacle Frontier Atlantic Southeast SkyWest Southwest Alaska Hawaiian Grade F F F F F F F F F F F DD C+ B+ A A A+ A+ Frequency 2 1 in 2,776 1 in 2,811 1 in 2,932 1 in 3,809 I in 3,696 1 in 5,015 1 in 6,755 I in 6,817 1 in 7,376 1 in 7,629 1 in 7,804 1 in 13,232 1 in 14,610 1 in 21,747 1 in 29,900 1 in 34,223 1 in 34,311 1 in 137,322 No Delays Atlantic Southeast, SkyWest, Alaska, and Hawaiian Airlines are to be commended for their excessive surface delay performance in 2009. Hawaiian Airlines is to be especially commended for their performance where no passenger experienced an excessive surface delay three (3) ≥ hours for 2009. Alaska Airlines also had excellent performance where only one (1) excessive surface delay ≥ three (3) hours was reported in 2009. 2 Frequency of Occurrence: Average number of flights between an Excessive Surface Delay ≥ three (3) hours Page 8 of 28 Table 5 shows the grading system that was used for scoring each airline. Table 5: Airline Grading System for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours Grade A+ A AB+ B BC+ C CD+ D DF Frequency 37,007+ 33,548 - 37,006 30,955 - 33,547 28,362 - 30,954 25,768 - 28361 23,174 - 25,767 21,445 - 23,173 19,716 - 21,444 17,987 - 19,715 16,258 - 17,986 14,529 - 16,257 12,799 - 14,528 1 - 12,798 3 Airport Score Card The Operational Evolution Partnership (OEP) Airports were graded for their performance in managing and reducing excessive surface delays. According to the FAA, the OEP 35 airports are commercial U.S. airports with significant activity. These airports serve major metropolitan areas and also serve as hubs for airline operations. More than 70 percent of passengers move through these airports. Because of the inconsistent data reporting by DOT’s BTS, a different grading system is used to grade the OEP 35 Airports. The OEP 35 airport grades are based on the following DOT BTS data: Page 9 of 28 Table 6: OEP 35 Airport Excessive Surface Delays Data: 2009 OEP Airports Chicago Midway Cleveland-Hopkins International Honolulu International Los Angeles International Phoenix Sky Harbor International Portland International San Diego International Lindbergh Tampa International Seattle -Tacoma International George Bush Intercontinental Lambert St. Louis International Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Las Vegas McCarran International Orlando International San Francisco International Memphis International Greater Pittsburgh International Salt Lake City International Miami International Denver International Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky Dallas-Fort Worth International Minneapolis-St Paul International Detroit Metro Wayne County Boston Logan International Baltimore-Washington International Charlotte/Douglas International Ronald Reagan National Newark International Chicago O'Hare International Atlanta Hartsfield International New York LaGuardia Philadelphia International Washington Dulles International New York John F. Kennedy International ID MDW CLE HNL LAX PHX PDX SAN TPA SEA IAH STL FLL LAS MCO SFO MEM PIT SLC MIA DEN CVG DFW MSP DTW BOS BWI CLT DCA EWR ORD ATL LGA PHL IAD JFK 180-239 minutes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 6 8 11 6 13 13 14 17 19 23 28 34 39 31 51 75 69 160 240-299 minutes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 3 3 4 3 2 2 11 3 14 18 33 300+ minutes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 2 2 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 3 2 6 8 12 13 13 13 15 20 22 27 31 36 41 48 55 89 89 195 Flights3 84,218 56,305 56,700 193,486 184,119 52,285 82,941 69,449 100,980 183,035 58,868 62,694 154,482 121,718 136,923 72,030 34,914 131,845 64,159 236,179 57,993 265,100 120,080 152,499 110,760 101,281 117,323 80,179 119,134 314,690 419,211 100,686 93,210 66,535 119,672 The airport grades are based on an equivalent weighting system for each excessive surface delay category. Each excessive surface delay between three (3) and four (4) hours is multiplied by the number 3, between four (4) and five (5) hours is multiplied by the number 4, and > five (5) hours is multiplied by the number 5. The number of flights is divided by the equivalency factor to obtain the score that is used to grade the airport performance. Hence, Table 7 shows 3 Flight Data is based on the number of Departures from January to December 2009 at each airport Page 10 of 28 the grade received by each OEP 35 Airport and Table 8 shows the grading system used to score the OEP 35 Airports for their excessive surface delays performance. Table 7: 2009 OEP 35 Airport Score Card OEP 35 Airports Chicago Midway Cleveland-Hopkins International Honolulu International Los Angeles International Phoenix Sky Harbor International Portland International San Diego International Lindbergh Tampa International Las Vegas McCarran International Seattle -Tacoma International George Bush Intercontinental San Francisco International Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Orlando International Lambert St. Louis International Memphis International Salt Lake City International Dallas-Fort Worth International Denver International Greater Pittsburgh International Detroit Metro Wayne County Minneapolis-St Paul International Miami International Chicago O'Hare International Atlanta Hartsfield International Boston Logan International Baltimore-Washington International Charlotte/Douglas International Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky Newark International Ronald Reagan National New York LaGuardia Philadelphia International Washington Dulles International New York John F. Kennedy International ID MDW CLE HNL LAX PHX PDX SAN TPA LAS SEA IAH SFO FLL MCO STL MEM SLC DFW DEN PIT DTW MSP MIA ORD ATL BOS BWI CLT CVG EWR DCA LGA PHL IAD JFK Equivalency Factor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 6 3 6 7 9 18 39 37 6 46 39 24 125 167 63 69 85 48 110 96 170 281 289 622 Score ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ 51,494 33,660 30,506 22,821 20,898 20,286 8,410 8,003 7,325 6,797 6,383 5,819 3,315 3,079 2,673 2,518 2,510 1,758 1,468 1,380 1,208 1,083 835 592 332 230 192 Grade A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ AAB+ B+ B+ CCD+ D+ D+ D DDDDDF F F F F F F F F F From Table 7, it is clear that JFK is the worst airport and certainly deserves an F for its performance in handling excessive surface delays. BOS, BWI, CLT, CVG, EWR, DCA, LGA, PHL, and IAD also received a grade of F for their performance. Page 11 of 28 It is to be noted that MDW, CLE, HNL, LAX, PDX, PHX, SAN, and TPA did not have a single excessive surface delay from January through December of 2009. These OEP 35 Airports are commended for this achievement. Table 8: OEP 35 Airport Grading System Score 1 - 2000 2001 - 4000 4001 - 6000 6001 - 8,000 8,001 - 10,000 10,001 - 12,000 12,001 - 14,000 14,001 - 16,000 16,001 - 20,000 20,001 - 30,000 30,001 - 40,000 40,001 - 50,000 > 50,000 Grade F DD D+ CC C+ BB B+ AA A+ 4 2009 Affiliated Airline Score Card Airlines that are in some way affiliated by having the same parent company, working agreement, or being a subsidiary of a larger airline are graded as a group for their performance in handling excessive surface delays. There are three (3) such conglomerates that have been identified. These conglomerates are: 1. American Airlines Conglomerate 2. Delta Airlines Conglomerate 3. Continental Airlines Conglomerate American and American Eagle Airlines are really associated airlines being owned by the AMR Corporation; Delta, Northwest (wholly owned subsidiary of Delta Airlines), Atlantic Southeast (Delta Connection), and Comair (wholly owned subsidiary of Delta Airlines) are associated airlines; and Continental and ExpressJet are associated airlines based on their new 7-year Capacity Purchase Agreement. The same grading system used for grading each individual airline will be used to assign grades for the conglomerates. Table 9, Table 10, and Table 11 form the basis for grading these conglomerates. The grades for these conglomerates are based on the following data obtained from BTS: Table 9: Delta Conglomerate 120-179 180+ minutes minutes Total 478 267 73 169 987 146 54 10 43 253 624 321 83 212 1240 Carrier Delta Comair Atlantic Southeast Northwest Total Flights 428,007 151,774 299,000 293,133 1,171,914 Page 12 of 28 Table 10: American Conglomerate Carrier American American Eagle Total 120-179 180+ minutes minutes Total Flights 440 110 550 551,597 307 56 363 437,009 747 166 913 988,606 Table 11: Continental Conglomerate Carrier Continental ExpressJet Total 120-179 180+ minutes minutes Total Flights 302 35 337 258,159 381 46 427 310,717 683 81 764 568,876 4.1 Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours Table 12 shows the affiliated airlines grades for their performance in 2009 for handling excessive surface delays two (2) hours. As listed in Table 12, only the American Airline ≥ conglomerate did not receive a grade of F. The Delta and Continental conglomerates both received a grade of F for their performance in 2009. Table 12: Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Two (2) Hours Conglomerate Grade Frequency Delta F 1 in 945 American D1 in 1,083 Continental F 1 in 745 4.2 Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours Table 13 shows the affiliated airlines grades for their performance in 2009 for handling excessive surface delays ≥ three (3) hours. As listed in Table 13, all affiliated airlines received a grade of F. Their performance as a group was simply terrible and they all deserved an F for 2009. Table 13: Affiliated Airlines Report Card for Excessive Surface Delays ≥ Three (3) Hours Conglomerate Delta American Continental Grade Frequency F 1 in 4,632 F 1 in 5,955 F 1 in 7,023 Page 13 of 28 5 Flyers Rights Organization Most Wanted List Table 14 is a list of items that the Flyers rights Organization is requesting of the DOT and the FAA to make these organizations more passenger-centric as opposed to airline-centric. The DOT and FAA have been historically airline-centric in their rule-making and policies and have forgotten that it is the passengers that are the real customers. As a result, the Flyers Rights Organization has drafted a most wanted list to balance this inequity. Table 14: FAA-DOT Most Wanted List Issue Passengers and Airline Employees have no voice or representation in the DOT and FAA. Wanted An independent Passenger-Centric Air Travel Ombudsman that reports to the Secretary of the DOT and the FAA Administrator to serve as a liaison between passengers and the Dot-FAA to ensure that passenger and airline employee issues are heard and resolved. Fines imposed for tarmac strandings should be apportioned in part to the Flying public similar to the European Union (EU) regulations and those of India. Airlines should be forced to perform as committed to in their contract of carriage (COC) regarding the services they offer for unaccompanied minors. Heavy fines should be imposed and legal action should be taken against the airlines. Responsible Agency DOT, FAA Passengers have no way to recover their losses from long TARMAC delays and strandings Minors have been left unaccompanied at airports and have been molested despite passengers having to pay additional fees to insure their child’s safety When passengers lose their baggage, it is next to impossible to receive compensation for lost items No Passenger advocate on Blue Ribbon Panels For long TARMAC delays and strandings, there is no solution in place to allow passengers to get off the aircraft in the near term DOT DOT Fines should be imposed for every 24 hours a bag is not returned to its owner, and if passengers need to replace items due to lost, damaged or pilfered items they should get reimbursed immediately upon providing receipts or a predetermined amount for not having receipts. Kate Hanni as the Passengers’ Representative on any Blue Ribbon Panel The FAA should mandate that a portion of the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants should be specifically allocated for the purchase of Co-Bus’s which will increase capacity until the modernization of the system can be completed FAA DOT FAA 6 2009 Airline Grades for Unreported Excessive Surface Delays Table 15 lists some unreported excessive surface delays of three (3) hours or more that have been uncovered by the Flyers Rights Organization from press releases and eyewitness accounts for the year 2009. The DOT does not include international flights in their reports and do not include smaller air carriers that have less than 1% of the gross domestic service. Based on the severity of the incident, a grade is assigned to the airline. Page 14 of 28 Table 15: 2009 Grades for Some Unreported Excessive Surface Delay Flights Grade F Airline Spirit Flight 268 Date May16 Hours 9 Incident Description Three jets were diverted to Philadelphia, one was allowed to go to a gate, the remaining two were held all night without food, water or clean toilets. Flight from the Turks and Caicos headed to Atlanta was diverted to Columbia, SC. After 6 hours on the tarmac, they were removed and put in an underground dungeon cell. One woman had an insulin reaction/diabetic shock. A brave passenger (Michael Anderson) began yelling to the other passengers about their rights to food and water. The pilot decided to take the aircraft back to the gate where the passengers were given vouchers and a schedule for their next flight. No food or water while passengers sat for 9 hours Vicky Spier reported that she was pregnant and having contractions and received no help Flight was canceled after spending 6 hours on the TARMAC at Dulles. Airline did nothing for passengers, it was midnight. Passengers had no food or water and were stranded. No food, water, or access to hygienic toilets. No help from Sun Country personnel. Flight from JFK to London was cancelled after spending 11 hours on TARMAC. Flight was diverted to Wichita Falls, Kansas after having multiple mechanical failures that left passengers scared and sitting for 7 hours before taking off to DFW where they spent the night on cots. FRO sent pizza’s to the airport but they were never delivered to the plane. President Obama’s flight was diverted to Dulles. All flights at Dulles were delayed until his flight could be completed. Chicago, O’Hare to LaGuardia, NY Flight from JFK to Phoenix, AZ, was canceled after spending 5.5 hours on the TARMAC. Michael Moore reported that passengers had no food or water. They were left to make their own arrangements once they got back to the gate, F Delta 510 Apr 17 6 D US Airways 1576 Jun 26 5 F F AirTran Delta 373 5935 Jan 28 Dec 13 9 5 F US Airways 7113 Jun 10 6 F F Sun Country British Airways 242 11 Aug 22 Dec 20 6 11 F American Eagle 642 Jun 10 7 D F Virgin America United VX97 686 Jun 03 Jan 19 6 5 F US Airways 17 Jun 26 5.5 7 2009 Longest Recorded Aggregated Times Table 16 lists the longest aggregated time (Time Spent on the TARMAC plus Flight Time) that have been uncovered by the Flyers Rights Organization from press releases and eyewitness accounts for the year 2009. The DOT does not include international flights in their reports and do not include smaller air carriers that have less than 1% of the gross domestic service. Based on the severity of the incident, a grade is assigned to the airline. Page 15 of 28 Grade F F F F F F F F Table 16: 2009 Longest Recorded Aggregated Times Airline Flight 4 Date TARMAC Hours Continental Express (Express Jet) 2816 Aug 7-8 6 AirTran 373 Jan 28 9 Spirit 268 May 15-16 9 Delta 510 Apr 10 6 American Eagle 642 Jun 10 7.5 AeroMexico 670 Jan 20 4 British Airways 11 Dec 20 11 Air Jamaica 0040 Dec 19 8 Flight Hours 4 3 3 4 2.5 14 0 0 Total 10 12 12 10 10 18 11 8 8 2009 Grades for Airline Food Availability We don’t grade the quality of airline food. We grade whether or not there’s enough food on board to feed hungry passengers in the event of a long TARMAC delay. Gleaned from airline websites on February 6, 2009, this report card alerts passengers to the types of flights they should bring their own food on-board if allowed by airport security. Shorter flights of less than 1.5 hours are notorious for having little or no essential needs available, while spending hours on airport TARMACs. The food availability report card shows red spaces for those flights on which the most risk exists for a passenger to experience having no food on board if an excessive surface delay occurs. A Yellow space is used when only snacks are available (pretzels, chips, etc.), usually consisting of too few calories to make a difference in an extended delay. A Green space indicates that a meal is available for a fee. A Hot Pink space indicates that a meal is available free of charge. Question marks are used for prices where carrier's website does not publish prices or indicate whether provisions are complimentary. These colors (hot pink, red, yellow, and green) are used to calculate a score for each airline for the food availability report card. Each color is assigned a number of points. Using the points representing the colors, a score is obtained. Based on the score, a grade is assigned to the airline for its food availability if an excessive surface delay occurs. Airline scoring is based on the following color scheme: Red Space Yellow Space Green Space Hot Pink Space 3 points 2 points 1 point 0 points Table 17 lists the grading system for Airline Food Availability grades. A score of “A” would indicate that the airline is prepared to provide passengers with food and water in case of an excessive surface delay, while a grade of “F” indicates that the airline is not prepared and 4 By clicking on the flight number, you can read the news account of the excessive surface delay incident. Page 16 of 28 passengers will most likely experience the worst scenario where they would be stuck on the TARMAC with no food or water. Table 17: 2009 Airline Food Availability Grading System Grade A B C D F Score 0 1–2 3–4 5–6 7–8 Grade D D D B D C F D C D F Airline Alaska American Air Tran Continental Delta Frontier JetBlue Northwest Southwest United US Air Table 18: 2009 Airline Grades for Food Availability Minimum 0 – 1.5 1.5 – 3 3 – 4.5 Service Hours Hours Hours Bev. ($0) None SB($5) SB($5), M($5) Bev. ($0) None SB($3-10) SB($3-10) Bev. ($0) None SB($3-6) SB($3-6) Bev. ($0) S SB($0), M($0) SB($0), M($0) Bev. ($0) S SB($3-8) SB($3), M($6-8) Bev. ($0) N/A SB($3), M($5) SB($3), M($5) Bev. ($0) M ($5) M ($5) M ($5) Bev. $3-$5 None M($10) S($3-5), M(10) Bev. ($0) S S SB($0) Bev. ($0) None S($9) S($3), SB($6) Bev. ($5) None SB($5), M($7) SB($5), M($7) > 4.5 Hours SB($5), M($5) SB($3-10) SB($3-6) SB($0), M($0) SB($3), M($6-8) SB($3), M($5) M ($5) S($3-5) M(10) SB($0) SB($6), M($9) SB($5), M($7) M = Meal SB = Snack Box: Yellow: Snack Box 50 calories or less; Green: Paid Snack or Snack box over 100 calories; Red: No snack; Hot Pink: No charge Snack, Snack Box or Meal 9 2009 Airline Water Quality Grades: Don’t Drink the Water Passengers with severely compromised immune systems, infants, and some elderly may be at increased risk if water is contaminated on airlines. These passengers should seek advice about drinking water on airlines from their health care providers. General guidelines on ways to lessen the risk of infection by microbes are available from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline at 1-800-426-4791 and in their Revised Public Notification Handbook which can be found at the following link: http://www.epa.gov/safewater/publicnotification/pdfs/guide_publicnotification_pnhandbo ok.pdf In 2009, the EPA created a final rule to force airlines to test their drinking water to ensure it’s not contaminated, however the testing mandates are infrequent and the airlines may choose the facility they want to test their water and the facility does not have to be certified by the EPA. Since there are no checks and balances, the Flyers Rights Organization recommends DON’T DRINK THE WATER. Only drink bottled water or sodas and certainly no ice. Page 17 of 28 On Thursday, February 14, 2009, KGO – San Francisco published an article on information they gathered through the Freedom of Information Act. They found that “fewer than half the airlines ordered as early as 2005 to begin testing their water have done so. Meantime, it's clear that some water on planes is contaminated.” “In 2004, tests conducted on 327 planes by the Environmental Protection Agency found 15percent of the aircraft evaluated had water contaminated with coliform.” "Coliform bacteria can indicate that the water has been contaminated and it could be contaminated by something that can make people sick," explains June Weintraub, an epidemiologist with the San Francisco Department of Public Health. Since 2005, 45 airlines have signed orders agreeing to test the water on their planes. But through the Freedom of Information Act, we discovered only 16 of those airlines have actually released results of those tests. Those tests results show water samples taken from 2,200 aircraft found coliform bacteria 10-percent of the time. Meanwhile, 29 airlines either haven't completed or begun their first round of testing or haven't released their test results. Delta, Continental, Northwest and United have released test results. However, American and US Airways are refusing to allow their data to be made public, claiming the results are "confidential business information. Among the major airlines that have released data, 12-percent of the 323 planes tested by Delta over a two (2) year period came back positive with coliform contaminated water. Delta says the overwhelming majority of its water samples came back negative. Sampling on Continental revealed 16-percent of the 883 aircrafts tested found water contaminated with coliform. The airline believes that data is seriously inflated due to faulty testing procedures it is now working to improve. Other averages include Northwest at 4-percent and United at 5.6-percent. United says it provides bottled water for brushing teeth and antiseptic napkins with every meal. Northwest says keeping its water supply free from contamination is a top priority. According to the EPA, the tolerance for coliform in water is zero. "We don't like to see any bacteria, especially coliform bacteria, in potable water, and especially not water that's being served to passengers," says Solomon. Atlantic Southeast, a regional East Coast airline that served over 12 million passengers in 2006 had the highest rate of positive tests for coliform: a whopping 49-percent of the 84 aircraft tested. The airline says if it detects coliform; it deactivates the water system until the problem is cleared. Page 18 of 28 "What you need on board an airplane in every restroom is a little placard on the wall that when they do the testing, they sign off on it and they tell you that the water is clean," says Wilson. We've compiled all the data we've obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, including test results from each airline and a list of the airlines that have not yet completed or even begun testing. The following airlines have not made their water testing results available to the public: • • American Airlines US Airways These airlines have submitted test results to the Environmental Protection Agency, but they are challenging ABC7's Freedom of Information Act request for that information. The EPA has yet to rule on that challenge. If the data is released to us, we will update the test results. The following airlines that have not submitted water test results to the EPA through February 11, 2009: American Eagle ExpressJet Freedom Airlines GoJet Horizon Air Jet Blue Mesa Airlines Skyway Airlines Southwest Airlines Spirit Airlines Airlines must have their water testing plans approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. The following airlines have not had their testing plans approved and have not submitted testing data to the EPA: Comair Frontier Mesama Miami Air North American Airlines Pace Airlines Pinnacle Airlines Primaris Airlines Republic Airways Ryan International Sierra Pacific Airlines Sky King Airlines Sky West Airlines Sun Country Airlines Tem Enterprises USA3000 Airlines PSA Airlines Table 19 lists the 2009 airline grades for water quality. Grade B B C F F F F Table 19: 2009 Airline Grades for Water Quality Airline Coliform % AirTran 3% Northwest 4% United 6% Delta 12% Continental 16% Alaska 28% Atlantic Southeast 49% Page 19 of 28 F F F F F F F F F American US Airways American Eagle ExpressJet JetBlue Mesa Southwest Comair SkyWest Refused Data Release Refused Data Release No Tests No Tests No Tests No Tests No Tests No Plan No Plan The grading system is based on the following scale: A 0% B 1 – 4% C 5 – 8% D 9 – 10% F > 10% Note the significant number of airlines receiving a grade of “F”. No airline received an “A” grade as the water showed some amount of contamination. The Flyers Rights Organization will continue to monitor the water quality issue and provide updates as necessary. 10 What does it really Cost to Fly? It is important that passengers know what it really cost to fly. Many airlines are now charging extra for items that use to be free. Airlines are charging extra for phone reservations, checked baggage (number, size, and weight), type of coach seat, beverages, snacks, meals, drinks, standby or confirmed seats, travel with pets, unaccompanied minors, non-refundable ticket changes, and curbside check-ins. Table 20, Table 21, and Table 22 list these additional fees. Lower fees are paid for online transactions and for longer flights of two (2) hours or more. Additional information can be obtained on the web sites for each online. Table 20: Phone Reservations, Checked Baggage, and Seat Selection Fees Seat Selection; Reservation by 1st Checked Bag 2nd Checked Bag Priority; Leg Airline Phone (person) Fee (each-way) Fee (each-way) Room American $20 $25 $35 None Continental $15 $23 – $25 $32 – $35 None Delta $20 $23 – $25 $32 – $35 None Northwest $20 $23 – $25 $32 – $35 $5 – $35 United $25 $20 – $25 $30 – $35 $14 – $109 US Airways $25 – $35 $23 – 25 $32 – $35 $5 – $30 AirTran $15 $15 $25 $6 – $20 Alaska $15 $15 $25 None Frontier $25 $20 $30 None JetBlue $15 Free $30 $10 – $30 Southwest Free Free $10 – $30 1-2: $0; 3+: $25 Spirit Free $15 – $25 $25 $5 – $15 Midwest $25 $20 $30 $65 Hawaiian $10 – $25 $15 $25 None Go Free $10 $17 None Page 20 of 28 ExpressJet Virgin America Allegiant Sun Country Free $15 $10 – $15 each way $10 Free $20 $15 – $35 $15 Free $20 $25 – 35 $25 None $50 – $100 $11 – $13 ? Table 21: Beverages, Drinks, Meals, Oversize Bag, and Standby or Confirmed Seat Fee Oversize Overweight Beverage/Snack Standby/Confirmed Airline Meal Alcohol Bag Fee Bag Fee Packet Seat Fee (each-way) (each-way) American Free/none $3 – $10 $6 $150 $50 – $100 $50 Continental Free Free $5 $100 $50 $0 – $50 Delta Free $3 – $8 $7 $175 $90 – $175 $50 Northwest Free/$3 – $5 $7 – $10 $5 $175 $90 – $175 $25 United Free $9 $6 $175 $125 Free US Airways Free/$5 $7 $7 $100 $50 – $100 $25 AirTran Free None $6 $49 – $79 $49 – $79 $0 – $49 Alaska Free $5 $5 $50 – $75 $50 $0 Frontier Free $3 $5 $75 $75 Varies Table 22: Travel with Pets, Unaccompanied Minors, Curbside Check-in, and Non-Refundable Ticket Change Fees Unaccompanied Non-Refundable Travel with Pets Airlines Minors Curbside Check-In Ticket Change (each-way) (per flight) Fee American $100 – $150 $100 Free $150 Continental $125 $75 – $100 Free $150 Delta $100 – $175 $100 Free $150 Northwest $100 – $175 $100 $2 $150 United $125 – $250 $99 $2 $150 US Airways $100 $100 $2 $150 AirTran $69 $39 – $59 Free $75 Alaska $100 $75 $2 $50 – $75 Frontier $150 $50 n/a $100 JetBlue $100 $75 $2 $100 Southwest $75 $25 Free Free Spirit $100 $75 $2 $80 – $90 Midwest $150 $50 – $100 Free $100 Hawaiian $175 – $225 $35 – $95 n/a $150 Go $25 $25 n/a $20 ExpressJet $50 $50 n/a $50 Virgin America $100 $75 n/a $50 Allegiant $100 $100 n/a $50 Sun Country $100 – $199 $50 Free $75 – $100 11 2009 Best and Worst Awards The Flyers Rights Organization Best and Worst 2009 Awards are given to airlines, airports, the DOT, FAA, and individuals for their contributions to improving or hindering passengers flying experience. The awards are given based on the following categories: Page 21 of 28 1. Special Awards a. They Treat You Like Dirt Award b. The Nausea Award c. The Most Absurd Event Award d. The Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Award e. Welcome to Our Country Award f. The My Heavens Award 2. Agency and Association Awards a. DOT b. FAA c. ATA 11.1 Special Awards The recipients of the Special Awards are shown in Table 23. Award Table 23: Special Award Winners Winner They Treat You Like Dirt Nausea Most Absurd Event Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Welcome to Our Country My Heavens Delta Airlines Continental and Mesaba Airlines American Airlines Spirit Airlines Air Jamaica, British Airways, AeroMexico SouthWest Delta Airlines is the recipient of the They Treat You Like Dirt Award as our members continue to complain about the service provided by Delta Airlines during an excessive Surface Delay ≥ three (3) hours. The winner of the Nausea Award is Continental and Mesaba Airlines (affiliate of Delta Airlines). Continental Express Flight 2816 left Houston at 9:23 PM on August 7, 2009 and arrived in Minneapolis at 9:30 AM on August 8, 2009. This nearly 12-hour event caught the attention of all the major news organizations and was a nightmare for the passengers. Although the flight was operated by Express Jet, the pilot for Express Jet pleaded with Continental Airline dispatchers to do something for the passengers. The DOT exonerated ExpressJet for the incident. Mesaba Airlines personnel did not understand airport security rules and refused to let the passengers off the airplane for the flight to Minneapolis that was diverted to Rochester where babies were screaming for six (6) hours, toilets were unusable, no food or water, and passengers had to smell toxic air for the entire duration. The winner of the Most Absurd Event Award is American Airlines. Mr. Gorden McKracken lost the opportunity to bid on a house that he was renting due to American Airlines holding him on the TARMAC for seven (7) hours. He was forced to move out of the property immediately upon arrival at Dallas, Ft. Worth. His American Eagle Flight 642 from Denver, CO to Dallas Ft Worth, TX was diverted to Wichita Falls, KS where he sat on the TARMAC for seven (7) hours. Flyers Page 22 of 28 Rights Organization ordered 10 pizzas and 12 liters of soda which were delivered to the airport with instructions to get the food and beverages to the airplane. The food ordered by FRO never made it to the airplane and it disappeared. The winner of the Flying Fickle of Fate Award is Spirit Airlines. Spirit Airlines flight 268 and two (2) other flights were on their way to Atlantic City, NJ from Fort Meyers, FL on May 15. The flights were diverted to Philadelphia where passengers on two (2) of the flights sat for nine (9) hours on the TARMAC. One of the flights deplaned at Atlantic Aviation but there was no room for the passengers of the other two (2) flights. After nine (9) hours on the TARMAC, buses were provided to take the passengers to Atlantic City, NJ. The entire episode took 24 hours for the passengers to arrive at Atlantic City, NJ from Fort Meyers, FL. The winners of the Welcome to Our Country Award are Air Jamaica, British Airways, and AeroMexico. Air Jamaica flight 0040 got stuck on the TARMAC at BWI for eight (8) hours on December 19, 2009 during a snow storm where it was difficult for it to maneuver. After being stuck for eight (8) hours, the flight was cancelled and the passengers were left at the airport with no help from Air Jamaica. British Airways Flight 11 from New York JFK to London on December 20, 2009 was on the TARMAC for 11 hours when the flight was cancelled and no help was offered to the passengers. Passengers on AeroMexico’s flight 670 had a nightmare come true. The flight from Mexico to Seattle, WA was diverted to Portland, OR where they spent four (4) hours on the TARMAC with no food or water. Paramedics were called in because some passengers had diabetic shock. The paramedics felt so bad about the way the passengers were treated that they bought all of the passengers McDonald’s Big Macs. Passengers got so angry that airport police boarded the plane and gave everyone an ultimatum: stay on the plane or be arrested. After four (4) hours on the TARMAC, the flight went back to Mexico. Ultimately, the flight left Mexico and landed in Seattle after an 18 hour ordeal. The winner this year of the prestigious My Heavens Award is SouthWest Airlines. SouthWest Airlines treat passengers like they matter and they appear to be passenger-centric. They say “The airline industry is complicated, but taking care of the passengers is simple.” The Flyers Rights Organization wants to congratulate SouthWest Airlines for the being the recipient of the prestigious My Heavens Award. 11.2 2009 Agencies and Associations Report Card The Agency and Association Awards are shown in Table 24. As shown in Table 24, only the ATA received a failing grade. Table 24: Agency/Associations Score Card Agency/Association DOT FAA ATA Grade A+ A+ F 11.2.1 2009 DOT/FAA Report Card Although the DOT’s Enforcement Division and their Consumer Affairs Division received an A+ for all of their work on the Rulemaking for Tarmac Delays, and their help with our members Page 23 of 28 who have exhausted all efforts to get help from the airlines, there are still gross reporting issues that the BTS could be handling differently in an effort to provide the public with better information on tarmac delays. The BTS relies entirely on what the airlines report to them and there are no measures taken to verify the accuracy of the reports. However, the DOT has released a new and improved website for aviation consumer protection and enforcement that’s going to be much easier for passengers to navigate through. Here is a link to the new site: http://airconsumer.dot.gov. We believe the flying public will appreciate this new format. This is not your Grandmothers Cadillac to coin a phrase, we are now dealing with a consumer friendly DOT and FAA who are willing to listen and respond to the needs of the flying public. Table 25 is a list detailing why DOT/FAA received an A+ grade for their efforts in 2009. There are several individuals at DOT that deserve recognition in the Enforcement Division: Sam Podberesky, Dayton Lehman, Robert Rivkin, and Secretary Ray Lahood. There are several people in the Consumer Affairs Division who have gone above and beyond to help our members with complicated isses: Norman Strickman, Patrick Nemons, and Kathleen Blankreither to name a few. Although the DOT has no obligation to mediate individual complaints, when we send them a complaint for which we have run into a dead end, they have stepped in and saved the day and for that we are really grateful! This new administration is truly consumer oriented and we appreciate all of their help. We would be remise in not mentioning President Obama whose insistence that passengers deserve better caused the executive order to be implemented and a 2nd rulemaking is on the way. Table 25: Rationale for Assigning a Grade of A+ for the DOT actions in 2009 DOT/FAA: A+ $175,000 Fine for Rochester Continental, Express Jet/Mesaba incident Secretary Ray LaHood and the enforcement division of the DOT imposed fines dissuasive enough to discourage airlines from making promises in their Customer Services Commitments that they cannot keep Consumer Affairs response to complaints forwarded by FlyersRights.org A+ Hawaiian Airlines: $50,000 fine For not disclosing code share arrangements implying that the passengers would be traveling on Hawaiian airlines and not one of their code share partners $15,000 Univair Airlines (a charter airline) Fine Ordered to cease and desist from unauthorized transportation between US and Canada US Airways: $70,000 Fine For violation of code share disclosure rules Paragon Air: $25,000 Civil Penalty Assessed a civil penalty for not providing refunds due to passengers at all or in a timely manner Delta Airlines fined $375,000 related to the over sales rule The violations stem from the carrier’s failure 1 to solicit volunteers before involuntarily denying boarding to passengers on oversold flights, 2) to furnish the required written notice to passengers who were denied boarding involuntarily (“bumped”), and 3) to provide bumped passengers with the appropriate amount and type of denied boarding compensation DBC in a timely manner. The order directs Delta to cease and desist from such further violations United Airlines : $80,000 Civil Penalty Violated the Departments code-share disclosure rule and the statutory prohibition against unfair and deceptive practices. The order directs United to cease and desist from future violations of part 257. In other words United must declare if you are booking on a code share flight Ticket Agent Fined $50,000 A ticket agent was fined for deceiving consumers about airport taxes and fees Page 24 of 28 Air Ambulance Worldwide, Inc fined $12,000 for unfair and deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition Holiday Airways: $50,000 Fine For purporting to the public it was an airline with public charter service when in fact it had not applied or been approved for such air transportation services. Holiday air held out service on its Internet website in a manner that could confuse the public into believing it was an airline, and distributed advertisements that failed to comply with the Departments rule on full fare advertising Angel Medflight: $10,000 Fine For purporting it is a direct air carrier, when in fact it is a service providing nurses and medical personnel for ill patients. SmartTours: $40,000 Fine Penalties for failing to publish the entire price to be paid by the passenger to the firm for certain air transportation Turismo Public Charter Operator: $40,000 Fine For unfair and deceptive practices by failing to maintain an escrow account and improperly used and handled charter participant funds in violation of 14 CFR parts 380 Condor Flugdienst GmbH (“Condor”): $22,000 Fine Violated the Department advertising requirements and assessed civil penalties Miami Air International Inc.: $50,000 Fine For violations of accounting and reporting requirements per 14 CFR Part 241 Statistics for Tarmac Delays DOT enacted rules to require airlines to more accurately report tarmac delays beginning October 1st. However, the new rules still omit reporting by international flights (including domestic airlines), and airlines that don’t account for at least 1% of domestic traffic (even though collectively these airlines account for 20-25% of all traffic). In addition, DOT failed to recognize that the data reported was made up “out of thin air”. To prevent Flyers Rights Organizations from analyzing the data further, November data was hidden from the public necessitating a FOIA request to access data that should be available to the public. Liberty Travel Inc.: $55,000 Fine A ticket agent, failed to comply with the Department’s rule on full fare advertising. A civil Penalty was assessed and Liberty was asked to cease and desist from future similar violations Virgin America $40,000 Fine For violating accounting and reporting requirements by failing to report certain quarterly financial reports with the Department for both the first and second calendar quarters of 2008. Pascan Air $20,000 A charter airline traveling between Canada and US provides passenger and cargo charter air service. DOT fined them for failing to obtain safety authority from the FAA DOT ANNOUNCES “TARMAC RULE” DEC. 21ST 2009: WE WON! On December 21, 2009, DOT announced their long awaiting “tarmac delay rule”. President Barak Obama gave an executive order mandating that no longer can the airlines hold you for longer than 3 hours without giving you the option to deplane, and after 2 hours of confinement in an aircraft they must give you access to potable water, food, hygienic toilets (toilets must be serviced), access to medications etc. April 29th 2010 the new rule takes effect! Spirit Airlines Consent Order: $375,000 Denied Boarding Compensation, Baggage, Full Fare Advertising Rule; $215,000 paid immediately; $160,000 due if within 1 year if Spirit Airlines violates any aspect of this consent order United Airlines: $75,000 For false advertising and deceptive practices related to United Airlines advertising “special deals” that did not contain appropriate notice of the amount or nature of additional taxes and fees that were excluded from the advertised fare 2nd Passenger Protection Rulemaking DOT is considering a 2nd passenger protections rulemaking that could include international flights for time on the tarmac. DOT Increased Bumping Compensation: Doubled from 200/400 to 400/800 Page 25 of 28 11.2.2 2009 Air Transport Association Grade and Award The ATA reportedly spent $5.8 million to push their agenda including attempting to defeat the passenger bill of rights in Congress and weakening of proposed passengers’ rights regulations by the DOT. As our report card shows, they’ve been very busy. But they have failed to convince this president and this DOT of the merits of their arguments. We anticipate more consumer friendly regulations in the near future and are grateful to the DOT for hearing our pleas for help and finally putting the consumer first. The Air Transport Association (ATA) received the Worst Association Award for their documented positions on issues that only serve to make a flying passenger’s experience a nightmare. Table 24 shows the positions that the ATA has taken on critical issues and their 2009 Report Card. Table 26: Air Transport Association 2009 Report Card Issue Opposes giving passengers a bottle of water and a granola bar when stranded for 3 hours.5 Continues to deceive media and public and the DOT about the frequency of lengthy TARMAC delays.5 Objects to the private right of action for consumers to sue the airlines at the State level. 6 Claims that blood clots are NOT caused by confinement in an aircraft. Claims to be advocating for additional delay reporting requirements but in fact opposes reporting of diversion tarmac delays to DOT. Opposes legislated "patchwork quilt" or minimum standards – prefers their own "patchwork quilt" with no standards. Contends that complaint contact information should only be provided on carrier's websites – ignoring the well-known digital-divide that discriminates against lower income people. Objects to providing flight delay information on their websites on the basis that average consumers possess the software engineering expertise to download enormous BTS databases to acquire this information. Grade F F F F F F F F 12 Most Wanted Transportation Safety Improvements Table 27 is a list of the transportation Safety Improvements requested by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Flyers Rights Organization joins the NTSB in requesting that the FAA comply with this request. 5 The Seattle Times, January 23, 2008 et al; http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgibin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=airlines23m&date=20080123 6 DOT Docket Management System, ATA Response to ANPRM (DOT-OST-2007-0022-0189.1) http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=DOT-OST-2007-0022 Page 26 of 28 MOST WANTED Transportation Safety Improvements Aviation Issue Areas Legend: = Airline Unacceptable response = Airline Acceptable response, progressing slowly = Airline Acceptable response, progressing in a timely manner = Being assessed, classification code to be assigned soon Table 27: Airline Response and Required Action to NTSB Safety Requests Use current research on freezing rain and large water droplets to revise the way aircraft are designed and approved for flight in icing conditions. Apply revised icing requirements to currently certificated aircraft. Require that airplanes with pneumatic deice boots activate boots as soon as the airplane enters icing conditions. Give immediate warnings of probable collisions/incursions directly to flight crews in the cockpit. Require specific air traffic control clearance for each runway crossing. Install cockpit moving map displays or automatic systems to alert pilots of attempted takeoffs from taxiways or wrong runways. Require landing distance assessment with an adequate safety margin for every landing. Install crash-protected image recorders in cockpits to give investigators more information to solve complex accidents. Set working hour limits for flight crews, aviation mechanics, and air traffic controllers based on fatigue research, circadian rhythms, and sleep and rest requirements. Develop a fatigue awareness and countermeasures program for air traffic controllers. Unacceptable Airline response Reduce Dangers to Aircraft Flying in Icing Conditions Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration Unacceptable Airline response Improve Runway Safety Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration Unacceptable response Require Image Recorders Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration Reduce Accidents and Incidents Caused by Human Fatigue Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration Improve Crew Resource Management Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration Unacceptable response Unacceptable response Require commuter and on-demand air taxi flight crews to receive crew resource management training. Page 27 of 28 Unacceptable response Improve Safety of Emergency Medical Services Flights Action Needed by The Federal Aviation Administration Conduct all flights with medical personnel on board in accordance with commuter aircraft regulations. Develop and implement flight risk evaluation programs. Require formalized dispatch and flight-following procedures including up-to-date weather information. Install terrain awareness and warning systems on aircraft. Page 28 of 28